To: jeffers
I've seen the 360º predictions on some of those models. I simply don't believe them. My : I believe they are acting like early "computer chess" programs which, in unclear positions, randomly moved their king back and forth. The lack of strong steering currents has hold of their logic now, but the GFS seems less prone to that. For that reason, I believe the GFS since more (not all) history supports that. (I certainly had to use "I believe" a whole bunch in that paragraph, didn't I? ...LOL)
225 posted on
09/24/2005 11:15:36 AM PDT by
AFPhys
((.Praying for President Bush, our troops, their families, and all my American neighbors..))
To: AFPhys
LOL...I hope you're right.
232 posted on
09/24/2005 11:17:43 AM PDT by
jeffers
To: AFPhys; jeffers
Computer predictions (at this stage) with the very complex stagnant pressure/fronts conditions in that area of the storm ARE much, much more random than realistic.
Almost all of the time, strong fronts and pressure systems across the country "move" the hurricane after it hits land: with this one, the computer programs are doing the "legendary" butterfly wing flapping" of (almost) random motion as different models use different criteria.
So, the ones earlier this morning showed: stopping over Ark. and Texarkana area, stopping then going left (SW), stopping and going right (E-SE).
They don't know.
241 posted on
09/24/2005 11:21:40 AM PDT by
Robert A Cook PE
(-I contribute to FR monthly, but ABBCNNBCBS supports Hillary's Secular Sexual Socialism every day.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson